Standard for Education of Science Teachers: The Nature of Science
Recommendations of the National Science Teachers Association
Map of Links to and from the Nature of Science
The NSTA Standards for Education of Teachers of Science were not written by the authors of this paper set, but are included in their entirety within the article. All standards are shown with a light blue background. Text by the authors of this article is on white and grey backgrounds.
Each of the ten standards was written collaboratively. This standard, The Nature of Science, was developed under the leadership of Norm Lederman.
Standard for Education of Science Teachers: The Nature of Science The program prepares teachers to engage students in activities to define the values, beliefs and assumptions inherent to the creation of scientific knowledge within the scientific community, and contrast science to other ways of knowing. Nature of science refers to:
Understanding of the nature of science has been an objective of science instruction since at least the first decade of this century (Central Association of Science and Mathematics Teachers, 1907). Sagan (1996) has written on the need for greater science literacy both as a defense against pseudoscience and against unquestioning acceptance of reported research. Recent efforts to reform science education in the United States have strongly emphasized this outcome (AAAS, 1993; NRC, 1996), which is an essential attribute of scientific literacy. While philosophers, historians, scientists, and science educators have not agreed on a single definition of the nature of science (Lederman & Niess, 1997), the concept in the educational literature generally refers to the values and assumptions inherent in the development and interpretation of scientific knowledge (Lederman, 1992). The academic arguments over the specific values and assumptions of science are probably of little consequence for K-12 students, or most adults. Most science educators would agree that the purpose of science instruction is not to create philosophers or historians of science but to educate individuals who can make valid judgements on the value of knowledge created by science and other ways of knowing. In this respect, it is important for them to be aware that scientific knowledge is tentative, empirically based, culturally embedded, and necessarily incorporates subjectivity, creativity, and inference (Lederman & Niess, 1997). Despite almost a century of concern, research clearly shows most students and teachers do not adequately understand the nature of science. For example, most teachers and students believe that all scientific investigations adhere to an identical set and sequence of steps known as the scientific method (McComas, 1996) and that theories are simply immature laws (Horner & Rubba, 1979). Students' misconceptions of the nature of science can certainly arise from misinformation from teachers of science. For reasons that are not clear, recent reform efforts have not emphasized staff development on the nature of science, perhaps because of questionable assumptions that teachers currently understand the nature of science, or that the current emphasis on teaching the processes of inquiry will lead by itself to better knowledge of science. Two assumptions appear to dominate policy and research related to teacher conceptions of the nature of science: that teacher conceptions are directly related to student conceptions, and that teacher conceptions necessarily influence classroom practice (Lederman, 1992). However, research does not clearly identify a relationship between the teacher's understanding and desire to teach the nature of science and his or her practices in the classroom. Many complex and sometimes competing factors (e.g., time constraints, curriculum constraints, teachers' intentions, teachers' beliefs about students) influence teacher behavior. To be effective in teaching the nature of science, teachers must believe that such instruction is both important and understandable, and then design instruction deliberately to achieve that goal. The various assumptions and values inherent in scientific knowledge need to be explained if students are to develop adequate understandings of the nature of science. Active inquiry is not enough. Students also must reflect upon their beliefs and actions. They must understand historical and social perspectives on science and scientific knowledge, using case studies and analysis of current issues and problems. The National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) identifies the study of issues relating science, technology and societal needs and values in a developmentally appropriate way as an essential part of any effort to teach the nature of science. 2.3 Recommendations of the National Science Teachers Association All students of science should have a fundamental grasp of the conventions and nature of science and how knowledge created by science differs from other forms of knowledge. Because of this, NSTA strongly recommends that college and university science programs include the nature of science as a thematic strand throughout their science curriculums. Such understanding requires more than participation in science content courses or science methods courses, even those stressing hands-on inquiry, discovery, or research. It requires an active analysis of the nature of knowledge, of the conventions of research and acceptance of findings, the historical evolution of scientific knowledge and an understanding of how humans learn in diverse and complex ways. All prospective teachers of science should have multiple opportunities to study and analyze literature related to the nature of science, such as The Demon Haunted World (Sagan, 1996); The Game of Science (McCain & Segal, 1989), Facts, Fraud and Fantasy (Goran, 1979) and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Kuhn, 1962). In addition, they should have the opportunity to analyze, discuss and debate topics and reports in the media related to the nature of science and scientific knowledge in courses and seminars throughout the program, not just in an educational context. Finally, students should engage in active investigation and analysis of the conventions of science as reflected in papers and reports in science, across fields, in order to understand similarities and differences in methods and interpretations in science, and to identify strengths and weaknesses of findings. The best preparation programs recognize that the nature of science should be understood by all persons who may pursue a career in science. Opportunities to study and understand the nature of science are strongly integrated into science and science education courses and experiences. Teacher candidates in such programs demonstrate a well-developed, integrated understanding of the conventions and nature of science and scientific knowledge, in contrast to other ways of knowing, and can translate that understanding into learning opportunities for students. 2.4 References American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. Central Association of Science and Mathematics Teachers. (1907). A consideration of the principles that should determine the courses in biology in the secondary schools. School Science and Mathematics, 7, 241-247. Goran, M. (1979), Fact, fraud and fantasy. Cranbury NJ: A. S. Barnes and Co., Inc. Horner, J., & Rubba, P. (1979). The laws-are-mature-theories fable. The Science Teacher, 46(2), 31. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(9), 771-783. Lederman, N.G., & Niess, M.L. (1997). The nature of science: Naturally? School Science and Mathematics, 97(1), 1-2. McCain, G. & Segal, E. M. (1989). The game of science. Belmont CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co. McComas, W. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 96, 10-16. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Science Teachers (1982). Science-technology-society: Science Education for the 1980's. Washington, DC: Author. Sagan, C. (1996). The demon-haunted world. Science as a candle in the dark. New York NY: Ballantine Books. |